A quarrel is better than a cold war, and we better remind ourselves the situations that we choose to be indifference toward our friends and families. Elie Wiesel urges people to face their own indifference, addressing that indifference denies the humanity of victims.
This whole speech is based on the ethos of Wiesel, conveying the message that he himself symbolizes humanity. Wiesel refers to his own experience during the Holocaust, the most infamous and evil event in history. Everyone likes stories, and Wiesel holds his audiences’ interests in his speech with his own story. Wiesel drags his audiences into his story, and his audiences will feel how grateful is this little boy toward the power of humanity. Opening the speech with a personal anecdote,
…show more content…
In paragraph 7, Wiesel argues that “Indifference elicits no response […] is not a response […] is not a beginning […] is an end […] is not only a sin […] is a punishment.” Through this parallel structure, Wiesel conveys that indifference is inhuman by setting up correspondences between indifference with no response, end, sin, and punishment, appealing to audiences’ logos. In a logical reasoning, when you agree with a claim, you have a tendency to agree with the next claim; these repeating phrases make sure Wiesel’s audiences agree with at least one of them, and later agree with his conclusion that indifference is inhuman. Wiesel emphasizes that indifference is inhuman with his reference of different scenarios of people treated indifferently, “the hungry children” and “the homeless refugees” were treated with indifferent responses like “not to respond to their plight” and “not to relieve their solitude”, which appeals to the audience’s emotion to think of how they would be treated terribly if people around them are indifference. The helpless and despairing scenes Wiesel creates cultivates his audience’s as well as your sympathies toward these victims, and forces you to question yourself that whether or not you yourself was one of those indifferent